The shroud has been carbon dated no older than the 13th century.
That theory has been debunked. If I remember correctly the carbon dating was done on patched parts of the shroud...or somesuch!
Not anymore...They have un-covered the piece of the Shroud carbon dated was the corner of the cloth that had been replaced by the fire in the 13th century.
There is still a lot of controversy regarding the carbon dating of the shroud.
You are so behind the times. Do some research - you'll find even the scientist who carbon dated' it - now recognize that the tiny piece of cloth they had to date was from patches woven in after the monastery fire in the 1200...
Do some research - with an open mind.
Don't believe everything you hear. Check out both sides an an issue.
there are many who will do/say anything to prove the Shroud a hoax. They will ignore 1,000 positive clues and grab for ONE that might be in variance.
We have the internet at our fingertips these days. No excuse for ignorance.
Patently untrue. The radiocarbon dating tests to which you refer have long since been shot down for numerous reasons, the primary being the fact that the samples tested came from a re-woven area of the Shroud vs. original cloth. That is established fact.
See the work of the late Sue Benford and the fantastic paper on the topic by the late Ray Rogers (of Los Alamos).
I suggest that you (frankly, everyone) do your homework before saying such things that have been disproven or shot down for years.
No. A 13th Century patch has been carbon dated no older than the 13th Century.
' Actually, no, it hasn't. It has now been conclusively been proved that what was tested in 1988 was a medieval patch made of a mixture of more modern cotton material and older original Linen material... The body of the Shroud itself is pure linen. Since the C14 sample was a melange of cotton and linen, the reported dates are also a melange of the ages of the cotton (estimated c.1650) and the linen (unknown origin). However, Harry Gove, the inventor of the technique used in the 1988 C14 testing, when asked what age the linen would have to have been to give the test dates the 1988 C14 test reported in the proportions of cotton to linen observed in the surviving sample, said that give or take 100 years, First century.
Learn to get up to speed before posting drivel.
Cheers!
“The shroud has been carbon dated no older than the 13th century.”
You are missing important information about that initial attempt to date the shroud.
“The shroud has been carbon dated no older than the 13th century.”
No, the patches have been carbon dated to around the fourteenth century...get informed. These patches also contained dye, which the original parts of the shroud do not contain.
I could be convinced one way or the other, since the truth of the Gospel accounts does not rest on this one piece of physical evidence. However the image is impressive to many, including experts, as being amazingly detailed and well-preserved, of no known method of human fabrication, and showing the awful torture involved in Roman crucifixion.
“The shroud has been carbon dated no older than the 13th century.”
Your information is incomplete. The carbon dating was of a patch used to repair the damage from a fire.